Jim Bunting, of Great Gull, River Dart, writes:

So, harbour 'bosses' need to make a 'step change' to take a more proactive role in the 'development' of the Dart, Report points way ahead for harbour, Chronicle, March 22. Let us all just hope they don't!

The Plymouth University report indicates Dartmouth is not presently 'missing out' on any opportunities and suggests that refinement of existing – and agreed – policies is the way to go.

Like the West Dart housing development, who wants or needs them to take a more 'pro-active' roll?

Dartmouth is not a bustling and expanding commercial port requiring intrusive or forceful management, it is a small very attractive 'leisure' harbour, loved by sailors and visitors from around the world – and particularly those lucky enough to have a mooring.

The harbour can and should certainly move into the 21st century.

Sue Puddock's proposals that harbour staff be able to accept card payments would certainly be welcome by all visitors. This is clearly the way to go and the sort of improvement that requires no consultation.

However, harbour 'bosses' should be aware that the odd visitor who slips in and slips out again without paying their dues is surely to be preferred to harbour staff demanding money before a visitor has even moored up.

The demanding of fees as visitors came over Salcombe bar led many visitors to transfer their allegiance to Dartmouth where there was a more laid- back regime and they were treated with more respect. Salcombe eventually listened and has now learned from its mistakes.

The unwillingness of our current harbourmaster to discuss his actions with harbour stakeholders or those likely to be affected, is the source of the 'communication problems' in the harbour.

We do not need a marketing officer to correct the problems, just open and honest discussion.

If quiet enjoyment of the harbour and its facilities is to be maintained, users must insist that any proposed changes are logical and agreed by all stakeholders before being implemented.